Archives

To avoid the United States and China falling into the Thucydides trap, in which a dominant power’s fear of a rising power necessarily leads to war, both nations would be well-served by further embracing a strategy of Mutually Assured Restraint (MAR), here outlined, some elements of which are already in place. Political scientists argue that history shows since the days of the ancient Greeks that when a new power arises and an old power does not yield ground and privileges wars ensue. However, the record also shows there are no historical iron laws, or trends that inevitably unfold. Harvard's Graham Allison points to four cases out of 15 since the sixteenth century in which the emergence of a new power was not followed by war—including the United States’ rise as a global power in the 1890s. Thus, to those who hold that the United States and China are fated to clash, I say it is not written in the stars.

In a previous paper, I outlined a privacy doctrine — a cyber age privacy doctrine, or a CAPD — that seeks to account for important differences between the paper age and the digital one. This paper attempts to show that the CAPD provides a coherent normative doctrine that can be employed by the courts and legislatures and that is more systematic, less subjective, and at least as operational as the prevailing privacy doctrines.

The Encyclopedia of Political Thought is the most comprehensive and rigorous treatment of significant political thinkers, political theories, concepts, ideas, and schools of thought.Click here for Amitai Etzioni's entries: "Common Good", "Community", and "Communitarianism"

In May 2013 the Pentagon released an unclassified summary of the top-secret Air-Sea Battle (ASB) Concept. ASB serves to focus the Pentagon’s efforts to organize, train and equip the armed forces against advanced weapons systems that threaten the US military’s unfettered freedom of access and action in the global commons. While officials claim ASB is merely improve service interoperability and could be applied in any number of conflict situations, this article argues that in fact the doctrine represents the Pentagon’s plan for confronting China’s increasingly capable and confident military.

From a social science viewpoint, that the United States courts keep drawing on Katz v. United States in their rulings about whether or not privacy has been violated is difficult to comprehend. This legal case is clearly based on untenable sociological and psychological assumptions. Continuing to draw on this concept, especially in the cyber age, undermines the legitimacy of the courts and hence of the law. This article reviews these arguments in order to further nail down the lid on Katz’s coffin so that this case — and the privacy doctrine that draws on it — will be allowed to rest in peace.